The Government has now set a precedent in seeking parliamentary authorisation for successive key decisions in the long-term Trident replacement programme over the next 20-30 years, including decisions on replacement submarines, warheads and ballistic missiles. It has also set a precedent in the degree of openness about its deliberations on the future of British nuclear weapons set out in the 2006 White Paper, evidence to the House of Commons Defence Committee’s hearings on Trident replacement in 2006 and 2007 and other Government statements. This stands in marked contrast to the secrecy surrounding previous nuclear weapon decisions and is a welcome development. This level of transparency should be commended but most importantly expanded.

The decision set out by the Government in the 2006 White Paper and endorsed by Parliament in March 2007 is the first of a series of decisions needed to replace the composite Trident system. Although a decision was taken in principle to replace Trident, that decision is not binding.

The Government’s formal position strongly suggests that the deal on Trident replacement is not done and that Parliament will have a major opportunity to reassess UK nuclear weapons policy and requirements around the 2012-2014 main gate decision.

The decision to proceed with the ‘Concept’ phase for a new fleet of submarines has resulted in the allocation of R&D funding for 2008-2011 in the Government’s October 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). The CSR settlement gives MOD an extra £7.7 billion over three years, a 1.5 per cent average annual real terms increase.[15] Part of this increase is for Trident replacement.[16]

MOD’s Defence Equipment and Support (DES) department has also established a Future Submarines Integrated Project Team (FSM-IPT). The IPT office was formally opened in October 2007 and will work for the next two years to develop a concept design for a new ballistic missile submarine. It is led by an MOD official with deputy leadership provided by BAE Systems, whose shipyard at Barrow will build any new submarines. Key people with responsibility for the process are Rear Admiral Andrew Mathews (Director General Submarines, DES), General Sir Kevin O’Donaghue (Chief of Defence Materiel) and Baroness Ann Taylor (Minister of State for Defence Equipment and Support). Other key personnel in MOD are Tom McKane (Director General Strategic Requirements) and Nick Bennet (Director General Strategic Technology).[17]

Having taken the decision to initiate the ‘Concept’ phase of the CADMID procurement cycle (Concept, Assessment, Demonstration, Manufacture, In-service, Disposal) for new submarines a long-term Trident replacement programme faces the following decisions:

1. Initial Gate: The ‘Assessment’ phase will begin following an ‘initial gate’ decision in 2009-2010 when approximately 15% of the £15-20 billion procurement costs will be committed.[18]
   
   
2. Main Gate: MOD “expects to place a contract for the detailed design of the submarines in the period 2012-2014”. This will be the main gate decision to begin the ‘Demonstration’ phase.[19] A contract to build the first submarine can be expected around 2016 – the ‘Manufacture’ phase. A key design issue will be the number of launch tubes the new submarines will have and therefore the number of missiles they can accommodate.
   
   
3. Three or four submarines: A decision on whether to procure a fourth submarine will be needed around 2020-22. There will be a debate on whether three or four are needed to fulfil the requirements of current British nuclear posture.[20]
   
   
4. The warhead: Decisions on whether to refurbish or replace the current warhead are likely to be needed in the next parliament.[21] Any decision to modify the warhead’s current capability or participate in the America’s proposed Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) programme could be controversial. The first US RRW design has already been signed off by the US Government’s Nuclear Weapons Council.[22] This RRW-1 is to replace a significant portion of the W-76 warheads that equip much of the US Trident II (D5) fleet. The UK’s Trident warhead is based on the W-76 design.[23] MOD is currently looking at replacement warhead options “to ensure we have a firm basis on which to make our decisions”, and the UK is reportedly working on a “High Surety Warhead” programme similar to the RRW.[24]
   
   
5. A new missile: Decisions will be needed on a successor to the current Trident II (D5) missile in the early- to mid-2030s. The US Navy plans to commission a new ballistic missile submarine into service in 2029 together with a new submarine-launched ballistic missile. R&D on the new missile will likely begin in the mid-2010s. The Government has sought assurances from the US that the missile it builds to replace Trident will be compatible with the new submarines the UK plans to build, but this is not guaranteed.
   
   
6. Tritium supply: A decision will be required on whether a new supply of tritium gas is needed for the current and next generation of Trident nuclear warheads.[25] Most nuclear weapons use tritium gas to ‘boost’ their yield. Tritium is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen and it needs to be periodically replenished since it decays with a half-life of 12.5 years.
   
   
7. Submarine nuclear reactors: Decisions will be required on whether a new facility is needed to manufacture reactor cores for the nuclear reactors that will power the new submarines and whether a new reactor design is necessary.[26] The reactors and reactor fuel cores are designed and manufactured by Rolls Royce at their Raynesway plant in Derbyshire.
   
   
8. An HEU manufacturing facility: A decision will be required on a new facility to manufacture highly enriched uranium (HEU) components for Trident nuclear warheads. When asked in June 2006 what plans there were for the construction of a new facility defence secretary Des Browne replied that “the capability to manufacture highly enriched uranium is required in order to maintain the existing Trident warheads throughout its intended in-service life and to provide material for naval propulsion”.[27]
   
   
9. A new dry dock: A decision may be needed on whether to build a new dry dock at the Clyde submarine base to service new ballistic missile submarin[28] es. This would be subject to Scottish planning regulations.

Previous / Next